From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cal. Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Arnett

U.S.
Jan 18, 2000
528 U.S. 1111 (2000)

Summary

rejecting government's argument that DPPA was valid exercise of Congress's power under Fourteenth Amendment, because "there is no constitutional right to privacy in motor vehicle record information which the DPPA enforces," since "an individual does not have a reasonable expectation that the information is confidential"

Summary of this case from Perales v. Heard

Opinion

No. 99-850.

January 18, 2000.


ORDER

C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, ante, p. 62. JUSTICE BREYER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Reported below: 179 F. 3d 690.


Summaries of

Cal. Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Arnett

U.S.
Jan 18, 2000
528 U.S. 1111 (2000)

rejecting government's argument that DPPA was valid exercise of Congress's power under Fourteenth Amendment, because "there is no constitutional right to privacy in motor vehicle record information which the DPPA enforces," since "an individual does not have a reasonable expectation that the information is confidential"

Summary of this case from Perales v. Heard

noting that whether the case is analyzed as a RIF or a mini-RIF, the central question remains the same: whether similarly situated male employees were treated more favorably

Summary of this case from Young v. Illinois Department of Revenue
Case details for

Cal. Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Arnett

Case Details

Full title:CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ET AL. v. ARNETT ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Jan 18, 2000

Citations

528 U.S. 1111 (2000)

Citing Cases

Wessel v. City of Albuquerque

Id. Verification by an independent auditor is required to give nonmembers "assurance that the reviewed books…

Siler-Khodr v. University of Tex. Health

Also, importantly, the Court has rejected only one relevant certiorari petition since Kimel.See Varner v.…